The points made in this 12 minute podcast are very good and apply to a number of threads in this forum. So I thought it best to start a new topic. There is a transcript as well. I especially liked the point about science being "self correcting".

www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/ockhamsrazor/the-importance-of-evidence/3102882

Good one Rob,
But I'm afraid it will only talk to the converted.

Ha! "500 scientists signed"
What was Einstein's quote? Something along the lines of, if they were right you'd only need one.

I only got two seconds in.

Select to expand quote

psychojoe said..
Ha! "500 scientists signed"
What was Einstein's quote? Something along the lines of, if they were right you'd only need one.

I only got two seconds in.

I'm not particularly surprised by that response.

But why did you not continue?

Select to expand quote

D3 said..

I'm not particularly surprised by that response.

But why did you not continue?

The increasing level of noise, the perpetual return to pet grievances or/and personal attacks are more a reflection of character than any proof of truth, lies, fact or fiction being discussed. The reality is the truth can be complicated. But not nearly as complicated, or damaging, as avoiding it in the first place.

Select to expand quote

D3 said

But why did you not continue?

We're 2,405 posts into Remery's opinions so I was playing the odds that this too would be a waste of time.

Select to expand quote

psychojoe said..

We're 2,405 posts into Remery's opinions so I was playing the odds that this too would be a waste of time.

You are afraid of science, critical thinking and skepticism?

Select to expand quote

remery said..

psychojoe said..

We're 2,405 posts into Remery's opinions so I was playing the odds that this too would be a waste of time.

You are afraid of science, critical thinking and skepticism?

Careful remery, if you can actually manage to apply critical thinking you become conservative.

Select to expand quote

psychojoe said..
We're 2,405 posts into Remery's opinions so I was playing the odds that this too would be a waste of time.

Read them have you? Page-turners they are not.

Michael, R.B., Breaux, B.O. The relationship between political affiliation and beliefs about sources of "fake news". Cogn. Research 6, 6 (2021). doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00278-1
.
We asked subjects to rate how familiar they were with each news source-presented in alphabetical order-on a scale from 1 (Not at all familiar) to 5 (Very familiar). This rating task followed immediately after the phase in which subjects provided real news, fake news, and propaganda ratings for the news sources.

Subjects then completed a Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) as a measure of analytic thinking (Frederick 2005). This test comprises 3 questions that tend to elicit different answers when thinking relatively effortlessly versus effortfully. For example, one question asks: "A bat and a ball cost $1.10. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?"
.
The results are consistent with an explanation in which people's political motivations influence their reasoning strategies. Put another way, people's beliefs regarding the news might reflect a desirability bias. These findings are potentially worrying. If people's beliefs about the credibility of news sources are determined in part by political affiliation, then unwarranted labeling of reputable news agencies as fake news by political groups could exacerbate media distrust among that group's constituents.

We also found that conservatives viewed our list of news agencies, on average, more as sources of fake news and propaganda than liberals. That finding fits with prior work showing a general distrust of news media among conservatives.

Select to expand quote

remery said..
: "A bat and a ball cost $1.10. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?".

Doh, that took me a disgracefully long time. I am blaming it on Sunday arvo stupor/stupid.

Select to expand quote

fangman said..

Doh, that took me a disgracefully long time. I am blaming it on Sunday arvo stupor/stupid.

Its an interesting way of quantifying Critical Thinking Ability.

I've met a few scientists who were creationist and a couple who beieved in consipiracy theories (eg Port Arthur massacre was a governmetn setup), its almost like their brains were compartmentalised. They could think critically when it came to a scientific study, but not when it came to real life.

Select to expand quote

fangman said..

remery said..
: "A bat and a ball cost $1.10. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?".

Doh, that took me a disgracefully long time. I am blaming it on Sunday arvo stupor/stupid.

I would think the fact that you took the time is what makes you a critical thinker. Someone who's not will go with the first easy answer their brain gives them. If you think critically, your brain might still provide the easy response, but you know there's more to it and think some more.

Select to expand quote

remery said..
"A bat and a ball cost $1.10. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?"

Holy-mololy. $1.10 for a bat and ball.

Is that retail including GST ?

Eitherway, it ain't easy under Albanese.

For anyone interested in thinking critically. A good outline, history of the term and some general references.

www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

Select to expand quote

Brent in Qld said..
For anyone interested in thinking critically. A good outline, history of the term and some general references.

www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

Strewth there is some heavyweight nerdy going on there. I even had to read the definition of critical thinking several times just to get my head around it. Probs if you are looking for a meme, this is not going to be your happy place. However, there are a shed load of resources; I think I will start at the K- 3 level and see how I go.

From the link extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Well, the evidence or science for a controlled demolition of WTC 7 is super strong.

It came down at near freefall speed.

It came down uniformly as in together.

It came down into its own footprint. Who needs controlled demolition experts anymore - just light a few isolated fires and hey presto...

You can see in the video footage of the collapse explosions going off prior to its collapse.

It is a such a wild theory that it was the debris and a few fires that brought the superstructure down.

The evidence for the 650 foot superstructure being brought down by debris from the twin towers and a few fires is flimsy at best - realistically it is non existent.

Satan behing behind 911 makes more sense than the drivel Pcdefender just posted.

The more you invest in their science the more you become entrapped.

WTC 7 is the achilles heel to THEIR SCIENCE and your response being a pic shows your investment takes priority over any lingering critical thinking skills you have left.

Select to expand quote

The SHOCKING Satanic Origins of NASA | Candace Ep 18 (youtube.com)

44 minutes Candice Owens gets into various topics.

A few of the 5000plus comments....




@foodismedicinedummy71074 days ago

Finally someone with a huge platform has learned science is religion. They teach our kids big bang in school, but not creation.... Thank you Candace




@taramccreary89973 days ago (edited)

Back in 2016 I almost lost my son about 16 hrs after being vaccinated. I had been investigating but like other people I felt bullied and pressured not to question "the science". That particular day i had decided to let them administer half of the vaccines. Soon after I personally dug in deep reading all the books and all the vaccine inserts, the trials, the doctors that were excommunicated from the field and I soon realized science was a religion. I was attacked for my decision and my outspokeness of vaccines by family, friends, and the medical professionals. I remember telling my husband "something is coming because you can't even ask questions let alone speak about vaccines. I believe this is the next issue the devil will use to divide us all." Fast forward to 2020 and I AM SO GLAD I was deep in my faith and confident with the lies and deception of the medical field and pharmaceutical companies pedal us. The bigger picture.... It's a war against principalities. The devil uses it to convince us our "eyes will be opened and we will become like God". Where does that sound familiar? Once you realize you can't trust them and to seek out the info on your own God will open your eyes to all the diabolical nonsense going on. God Bless. Christ is King

/emoji/7ff574f2/emoji_u271d.png?JMJ

/emoji/7ff574f2/emoji_u271d.png?

Do you really think anyone other than you is deluded enough to click "Expand Quote"?

The folks like yourself - no

I was thinking an observable experiments for the Average Joe again. Flying to New York and visiting Manhattan and the WTC memorial in order to validate your beliefs would be a good one. First of all catch a flight to Hong Kong. Then the connecting flight straight into New York. Make sure you take your GPS, because the flights out of HK often go over or very near the North Pole. It's sorta cool to look out the window tick it off your list of things to do. I am not sure how this pans out in the Flat Earth realms, but eventually you will touch down to be greeted by US customs and immigrations. They love a queue, have absolutely no sense of humour, will treat you like a scumbag terrorist and are just about the exact opposite of every US citizen I have ever met in New York.
Once you have made your way onto Manhattan, (assuming you get that far) take the subway down to the WTC memorial and museum. I challenge you to walk around the pools, read the almost 3000 names of the people who died, and sit in reflection for a while.
If you have a shred of humanity you will then realise posting BS about WTC buildings and the events of that day, is offensive to their memory, their families and to human decency.

If you post this almost endless stream of stupidity just to get some sort of trolling high, well congrats. You won.

Select to expand quote

Brent in Qld said..
For anyone interested in thinking critically. A good outline, history of the term and some general references.

www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

That's just common sense

Select to expand quote

fangman said..
I was thinking an observable experiments for the Average Joe again. Flying to New York and visiting Manhattan and the WTC memorial in order to validate your beliefs would be a good one. First of all catch a flight to Hong Kong. Then the connecting flight straight into New York. Make sure you take your GPS, because the flights out of HK often go over or very near the North Pole. It's sorta cool to look out the window tick it off your list of things to do. I am not sure how this pans out in the Flat Earth realms, but eventually you will touch down to be greeted by US customs and immigrations. They love a queue, have absolutely no sense of humour, will treat you like a scumbag terrorist and are just about the exact opposite of every US citizen I have ever met in New York.
Once you have made your way onto Manhattan, (assuming you get that far) take the subway down to the WTC memorial and museum. I challenge you to walk around the pools, read the almost 3000 names of the people who died, and sit in reflection for a while.
If you have a shred of humanity you will then realise posting BS about WTC buildings and the events of that day, is offensive to their memory, their families and to human decency.

If you post this almost endless stream of stupidity just to get some sort of trolling high, well congrats. You won.

3,000 names!... Multiply that by the family and friends that Pcdefender has shown contempt for with his disgusting and self-interested remarks. Pcdefender/PM33/Petermac is a disgrace (and an idiot).

Select to expand quote

Mr Milk said..

Brent in Qld said..
For anyone interested in thinking critically. A good outline, history of the term and some general references.

www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

That's just common sense

From Wikipedia Common sense is "knowledge, judgement, and taste which is more or less universal and which is held more or less without reflection or argument"

This sounds wonderful until one considers universal knowledge is 'more or less' an impossibility. We are all individuals and if one acts or thinks without reflection, particularly of one's own system of belief, common sense can rapidly become unquestionable dogma. I'm personally sceptical of common sense, I find it too often gets loaded with personal/individual assumptions that get lumped onto the wider population. Certainly there is a function for common sense within a society/culture, it's when common sense is assumed that my hackles rise.

Hence posting the link, at least there can be a common point of reference for this interesting topic whether we think its common sense or new knowledge.

Hang in there PC. I'm not sure what happened either way, certainly looked like controlled demolition, and a lot of evidence points me in that direction. But as Fangman eluded to, a lot of people who lost love ones believe the official story which may well be true so it's important to respect that possibility.

Select to expand quote

psychojoe said..
Hang in there PC. I'm not sure what happened either way, certainly looked like controlled demolition, and a lot of evidence points me in that direction. But as Fangman eluded to, a lot of people who lost love ones believe the official story which may well be true so it's important to respect that possibility.

"... remember that elude begins with an E and is often concerned with escaping and evading, while allude, beginning with an A, is a way of talking about things without direct mention."

Select to expand quote

remery said..

psychojoe said..
Hang in there PC. I'm not sure what happened either way, certainly looked like controlled demolition, and a lot of evidence points me in that direction. But as Fangman eluded to, a lot of people who lost love ones believe the official story which may well be true so it's important to respect that possibility.

"... remember that elude begins with an E and is often concerned with escaping and evading, while allude, beginning with an A, is a way of talking about things without direct mention."

Thanks. I must be tired.

Many if not most of the families now question the official story according to Richard Gage the founder of Architects and Engineers For 911 Truth.

They have a petition which tens of thousands of architects and engineers have already signed calling for an independent investigation into what happened.

I am certain the victims families want to know the truth.